08 Aug 06
well i find it disrespectful if someone keeps playing on when they like a piece down which is a rook or if they lose their queen for a bishop or knight. most people can't come back from that deficit if we're at the same level. But i have had some games latley where they tried to play on the game and one of them almost drew me and the in the other one i thought that i had mate in 3 and he wiggled out of it although i had a queen a knight and a bishop against a rook. if someone makes you mate them dont complain about it you wouldn't complain about it in a tournament.
22 Aug 06
Originally posted by millermanHa ha ha ... this is great !! I have been away for a week and indeed Mr Mammothman you stirrer ... I am suprised at ya! 🙄
O.K Caro kann,
So in no way did you ask him to resign or say better players would have resigned by now?
🙄
And sorry Carrot Kant but ya did ya know !! I only continued playing because of the dig ... din't expect to win at all ... 😛 😛 your insults drove me to drag the game out as long as poss ..
Here is the msg log from the game ..
Message logMove Player Message
37 White Oh dear !! That wasnt very clever was it !
37 Black you have been lost for ages you idiot. any good player would have resigned ages ago.
38 White Thanks for the insults BTW .. it is sooo gratifying to hear advice from such a masterB ... You twisted chunk of vomitous pigeon droppings
I still laugh about it every day ! ! 😉😀😉😀😵 In fact I'm laughing now!!
22 Aug 06
Originally posted by Caro KannI took a fast look at the game and it seemed to me you could have stopped that mate. give up a pawn or two too sac a queen or two would have stoped that loss?
I agree it was a funny game.
But the thing about being a bad sport for not resigning half way thru? Where you get that from.
And I couldnt do anything the mate was forced
22 Aug 06
Originally posted by ShinidokiOddly enough, this problem (from page 1) also finds White without a forced mate.
You can be down and overwhelming amount of material and still mate....
[fen]7k/4RK1P/4PPPP/3N3P/5P2/4nnbr/4qqqq/1B1bqqqq b - - 0 1[/fen]
Black to move.
***I'm sure its even possible to create a position where white has even less material and still mates.
In practical play however, most people would get a single Queen then defend/attack, not march another 3 pawns down the board while white/black carries out his own plans
23 Aug 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemthat does not matter in a problem. it doesn't have to be a legal position.
Both DragonFire's and Shinidoki's positions are illegal. The former shows 9 promoted pieces, while the latter requires many wP captures, but Black isn't missing enough pieces. In both cases, Black can escape mate by simply pointing out that the position is illegal.
23 Aug 06
2 edits
Originally posted by tomtom232If you don't have a legal position, it's not a chess problem anymore. If the rules of the game don't matter, or can be violated at will, then why not move the King three squares at a time to get out of checkmate?
that does not matter in a problem. it doesn't have to be a legal position.
This is exactly why chess problem magazines will not accept originals with illegal positions (the exception is chess variant problems).
Edit: Here are two links illustrating the convention of legality.
http://www.math.harvard.edu/~elkies/FS23j.03/glossary_chess.html
"Legal position (n.): a position that can be reached from the initial array by game consisting entirely of legal moves, however bizarre. Conventionally any chess problem should have a legal position." (emphasis mine)
http://www.bcps.knightsfield.co.uk/introduction.html
"Position
Chess problems do not use positions taken from games. A diagram inviting you to work out how a chess player overcame his opponent is hopefully interesting, intriguing and instructive, but it is not a chess problem. The position of a chess problem is created by a Composer (or Problemist). By convention the position should be legal, that is, it must be capable of arising in a game of chess, however unlikely the moves leading up to it may have been." (emphasis mine)
Edit 2: And finally, the killer, from the FIDE Codex of Chess Composition: (http://www.sci.fi/~stniekat/pccc/codex.htm)
"Chapter IV - Miscellaneous Conventions
Article 14 - Legality of Positions
(1) A position is legal if it can be reached by a sequence of moves from the initial array [17]. Otherwise, the position is called illegal [18].
(2) In studies and problems that apply the FIDE-rules, illegal positions are not acceptable for composition tournaments unless the tournament conditions so stipulate." (emphasis mine)